|
By Jon Coupal
Proponents of the anti-Proposition 13 ballot measure Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 (ACA1) are planning to amend the measure and replace it with another threat to taxpayers that only targets property owners.
As currently submitted and approved for the ballot, ACA 1 repeals the two-thirds vote protection for both local tax increases and bonds in order to pay for “infrastructure,” a term so expansive that local governments would be able to raise taxes for almost any purpose with a vote of just 55% of the electorate. This would make it far too easy to raise local taxes that are currently subject to the higher threshold.
But the problem for supporters of ACA 1 has been the popularity of Proposition 13. Since it was enacted in 1978, voters have continued to support the important two-thirds vote protection as evidenced by numerous polls over the years.
Various iterations of ACA 1 have been introduced in the Legislature over the last two decades but last year was the first time that legislative leadership – including the bill’s author and chief cheerleader, Assembly member Cecilia Aguiar-Curry – was able to jam it through both houses with the requisite two-thirds vote of each house.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the ballot. Proponents of ACA 1 learned what taxpayer advocates have been telling them for over forty years – that direct attacks on Proposition 13 would result in severe opposition at the ballot box. Their own polling indicated that ACA 1 would fail in a statewide vote.
“Recent voter surveys have indicated a lack of support for the special taxes portion of the constitutional amendment,” according to agenda documents from a recent meeting of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments Joint Legislation Committee.
They are counting on ACA 1’s lower threshold for bonds to dramatically raise taxes in the Bay Area:
“Based on multiple polls conducted by EMC Research, it seems clear that a 55 percent vote threshold is critical to securing passage of the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority’s pending ballot measure for a $20 billion regional housing bond.”
Hence, Plan B.
To read the entire column, please click here
|
